Right, this is the difference. The President of the USA, and in parallel the British Prime Minister, is an elected politician with all that involves. He stands or falls at the ballot box by appealing to you for votes based on what he has done or says he will do. Ultimately he is begging for your support.

What does deserve unstinting respect however is your Constitution. We do not have a Constitution, not a written one anyway. British Government thrives by the monarch allowing a democratically elected government to produce or change laws. It is all based on precedent developed quite bloodily centuries ago. In theory the Queen can sack the PM at her whim. In reality that would never happen because chaos would ensue. Effectively the monarch IS the constitution. That is why she is non-political and thus such a powerful representative of the UK abroad. It sounds complicated but isn't really. I once spent a whole evening trying to explain the role of the British monarchy to an American aunt of my wife's, and she still didn't believe we didn't have a constitution at the end.

Bottom line - I can hold ( and state) what opinions I like about my Prime Minister and indeed your President. I won't, however, mock either my monarch or your Constitution. Hope some of that is clear.

AAFlyer, you jumped in before me. Ah yes, the joys of punk rock in a democracy. Who's still around, the Sex Pistols or the Queen? BTW they were British. I don't expect foreigners to come here and comment thus on what I hold dear, any more than I would go to Washington and tell your President what I thought of his fiscal policies or whatever.

I think you can respect the monarch as ceremonial Head of State

and still ridicule in this day and age the very idea of a monarchy in any form

They sure are British (the 3 that are still around, although I believe one is living the high life in LA after he took US citizenship). At the same time that didn't stop the world's greatest rock'n roll band (btw, still one of my favo(u)rite) who are also British, criticizing our president on their last album.

I actually believe that criticizing leaders of our allies should not be seen as a sign of disrespect to the citizens of that nation. What I find disrespectful is when somebody starts criticizing the entire nation and it's citizens based on some unsubstantiated assumptions, for no other reason than just to make themselves feel better. I know of at least 2-3 such posters right here on Fodors. They seem to dwell on any opportunity to knock down anything American. And AFAIK, they are British subjects.

AA - did you read the British Humor Thread

sometimes that seemingly biting criticism is really that ballyhooed biting British humor

I actually often agree with those 2 or 3 BTW

I do not see any malicious attempts to do what you say, respectively

Well <b>PalenQ</b>,

you were being asked about the constant attacks on the holy monarchy. You responded brilliantly. I got involved in a little debate with that particular poster and I was just trying to make my point.

That said, and with all due respect to your point of view, I see the 2-3 posters as the &quot;village idiots&quot;. You think they are &quot;just being funny, the dry humo(u)r, etc&quot;. I have a great sense of humo(u)r and I also spend a great deal of time in the UK. I have many friends there, and in fact there is a chance shortly that I may move there for some time, so I do enjoy the British dry wit, but I don't believe that's the case with the posters I'm thinking of. Monty Python Flying Circus(love that show) they're NOT! YMMV. Just my opinion and nobody has to agree. (btw, this is not directed at <b>stfc</b> in any way shape or form). I actually enjoyed the little sparring and exchange of ideas with that particular poster. Good day!